Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My friend saw the workman who had just painted over it. The workman said he'd been told to paint out the graffiti but if that wasn't possible simply to paint out the offending section. He agreed that how the mural has been left, is now a real gift to graffiti artists, a blank canvas in fact.

I don't think it's about the artistic merit of the mural (it's rather naive, in fact), but rather that it is/was part of the community and people enjoyed it. It also looked nice over the playground. But now the space looks even worse than it did before and is ironically open to being targeted by the very graffiti it was covering.


I honestly think it can be restored if the council were to take the time and spend some ??. It would entail removing the offending blue paint and subsequent graffiti underneath and having someone to basically repaint the areas that were damaged (ie, where the original mural paint were stripped away). The mural itself is not that old and is on brick as opposed to something more fragile like gesso on plaster so it could probably handle the process.


Thanks for the link, will send off an email to the appropriate drone at Southwark.

As Goose Green lies on the boundaries of a few wards, probably best to write to all of the following councillors:


East Dulwich

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]


South Camberwell

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]


Peckham Rye

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Am I the only one to feel that the local cultural significance of the mural runs even deeper than is evident? Surely it is a direct historical reference to the fact that mind altering substances have been for sale in Peckham since the 18th century.

The local press are on to it... graffiti cover up is the official line but there are apparent plans to restore the original mural,

PM me to air any individual concerns or comments!!! Might have been nice to have discussed this before painting over it?

DY

Mark Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As Goose Green lies on the boundaries of a few

> wards, probably best to write to all of the

> following councillors:

>

> East Dulwich

> [email protected]

> [email protected]

> [email protected]

>

> South Camberwell

> [email protected]

> [email protected]

> [email protected]

>

> Peckham Rye

> [email protected]

> [email protected]

> [email protected]


NOTE: Richard Thomas has already responded on this thread and by e-mail:


see below:

Dear Richard


Graffiti removal is carried out on our behalf by Southwark Cleaning and

I have forwarded this e-mail on for their comment.


Regards


Jon


-----Original Message-----

From: Thomas, Richard

Sent: 21 September 2008 19:46

To: Davies, Gill; membersenquiries; Sheaff, Jon

Cc: Ian Whitehouse

Subject: FW: Blake Mural



Dear Gill and Jon


Please could you go to this link and and view the pictures. Why was

this done to the mural?


Best wishes



Cllr Richard Thomas,

Liberal Democrat, East Dulwich.

www.richardthomas.org.uk

I've been informed that the mural's actually in the Lane Ward so the councillors for that are:


[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]


Tessa Jowell's office contacted me to let me know that they "have contacted the local councillors and also Southwark to add Tessa Jowell's concerns to those already expressed."


Which is nice.

I have received this:


Dear


I've spoken with my colleague Bimal Kotecha in the Public Realm section who deals with this area. He tells me that as the mural is on private property, there there will have been an agreement between the vicarage and the council to carry out this painting. The Parks team are going to visit the vicarage on Wednesday to agree what will happen with the wall, i.e whether the mural will be restored.


If you have any further questions, Bimal can be contacted directly on 020 7525 0814 or [email protected].


Thank you very much for contacting us about this.


Regards

Katherine


Edited again to remove reference to the Dulwich Society as I realised the above was not in response to my email to them but to an email to someone else, duh.

> I've spoken with my colleague Bimal Kotecha in the

> Public Realm section who deals with this area. He

> tells me that as the mural is on private property,

> there there will have been an agreement between

> the vicarage and the council to carry out this

> painting.


As I mentioned in an earlier post, this exact thing happened to a youth group in SE1 who had painted a mural on the side of the building that they meet in. Also to some land belonging to Network Rail on the South Bank (ditto a community mural which NR had agreed to being painted). In neither case did Southwark Cleaning obtain the permission of the building owners before painting out large sections of the artwork, as there was a huge fuss about it and complaints galore, just as there are here.


I am very certain of there was no permission in respect of the youth group mural as I was heavily involved with them at the time and I still have copies of the letters from Southwark Council which assert that, because the mural was on a public street, albeit a private building, they had the right to paint it out. This was eventually amended to "we had complaints from the neighbours and weren't able get in touch with anyone from the group" (despite the fact it is part funded by Southwark Council and even appears in their own directory). We didn't even get an apology. This was a few years back so maybe internal procedure has got better, but I'm not convinced at this stage.

I'm heartbroken to see the mural painted over.


Art and local artists have been at the heart of re-generating the Bellenden area (Anthony Gormley, John Latham, Tom Phillips, Zandra Rhodes and many others), building on historic artistic links such as association of Peckham Rye with William Blake. The mural transformed the immediate area when it was painted and is treasured by many/all who live in the area.


The mural with graffiti is infinitely preferable to a bare wall with no mural and no graffiti. The ideal, obviously, would be for the council to maintain the mural and keep it free of graffiti.


According to Wikipedia, the orginal artist was Stan Peskett:


Wikipedia entry for Peckham


Stan has a website at the following addess:


Stan Peskett


which includes an item on the William Blake Mural:


William Blake Mural


I'll email Stan to see if he's aware of the damage to the mural and if he still lives in the area.


On his site, he talks about a similar incident in 1997:


"In 1997 part of the mural was stolen brick by brick. Unfortunately neither the Local Member of Parliament Tessa Jowell nor the local church that used the mural for fund raising purposes wanted help in the reinstatement of the mural. Even though it has become a historic fixture and featured in the tour guide books along with the Globe theatre for the London Borough of Southwark."


Unlike 1997, on this occasion we know who is reponsible. And hopefully, some kind of concensus can be achieved on re-instating the mural.

I have emailed Bimal Kotecha (see above) and asked him to let me know the outcome of the council's discussions with the vicarage tomorrow.


I'll post on here as soon as I have any news. Won't be till after tomorrow night though as I'm out all day and evening.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
    • Anyone has a storage or a display rack for Albums LPs drop me a message thanks
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...